MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4211199245 · doi:10.1017/9781108894166.015

Navigating First Nations social and emotional wellbeing in mainstream mental health services

2021· book-chapter· en· W4211199245 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamIndigenousMental healthHealth careNursingCultural safetyPublic relationsDocumentationSociologyPsychologyMedical educationMedicinePolitical sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yatdjuligin: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Nursing and Midwifery Care introduces students to the fundamentals of health care of Indigenous Australians, encompassing the perspectives of both the client and the health practitioner. Written for all nurses and midwives, this book addresses the relationship between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and mainstream health services and introduces readers to practice and research in a variety of healthcare contexts. This new edition has been fully updated to reflect current research and documentation, with an emphasis on cultural safety. Three new chapters cover Torres Strait Islander health and wellbeing, social and emotional wellbeing in mainstream mental health services and quantitative research. Chapter content is complemented by case study scenarios, author reflections and reflection questions. These features illustrate historical and contemporary challenges, encourage students to reflect on their own attitudes and values, and provide strategies to deliver quality, person-centred health care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→